Why do we want to kill the big ones?

[Chad Carney]

matjo1,

Coming from a newly relocated beginning spearfisherman, I have to question your information, and definitely disagree with you.

There are plenty of big educated fish out there, and very few good spearfishermen hunting them.

Good luck trying to take out any of these wary fish, you're going to need it!

I'd suggest directing your energy towards a real threat like over-efficient unchecked commercial fishing, rather than going after trophy spearos.

Also join the FRA, http://www.thefra.org and learn what you're talking about, so possibly we can all continue to enjoy the sport of spearfishing.

Chad

 

[matjo1]

and learn what you're talking about, so possibly we can all continue to enjoy the sport of spearfishing.

Of course I don't know what I'm talking about, that was the whole point of my first thread! Yet you, nor any other trophy hunters (exept forJustinW) gave me an intelligent reason of why I was wrong. This is obviously a sore subject for you guys, but if you spent your time educating instead of criticizing, I'm sure you would have more people on your side. Bottom line, I was your easiest catch and you blew it.

Annoyed and alienated

 

[Wayward Son]

Some species, you do the most harm by taking small ones. red grouper are one, they are all female until they get old enough & they change to male. In terms of size, FWS says this happens at about 23 inches. So if you take smaller ones, you're taking females. By holding out for larger ones, you get males & have much less an impact on the species.

I'm sure there are other species with similar oddities.

 

[Rick Murchison]

When I was young and immortal I went after the big ones. These days I'm selecting for the plate, and avoiding getting beat slap to death.
Rick

 

[Ironcat]

I am a dry land hunter for a few months out of the year but lucky enough to live in South Florida where I can spear all year long. Animals of almost any species once they get up to "big one" status have most likely done what they needed to do to fill the niche Mother Nature (or God, or Allah, or The Great Buffalo Spirit) put them here to do. Their job is basically continuation of the species. At a certain point they are actually taking away from the both their species and their environment. Let's say we had a hog snapper live long enough to reach 5' and 100 pounds. He has most likely bred more than his fair share because the female hogs would have chosen him for a mate over the smaller ones but he is also most likely eating as much as 5 smaller (regular sized) fish would eat, he'll even be eating smaller (breeding sized) fishies.
I don't know if old fish get weaker the way old mammals do, but if there was such a thing as a 20 year old 20 point white tail, he would still attract attention from the ladies and intimidate lots of younger healthy bucks, but he would be too slow and weak to protect his territory or himself from the ravages of time.

 

[Hank49]

This is a good question. But dreams of the "big one" are one thing that keeps me stoked to go out again and again and again, spending way more on gas than I'll ever get in fish. Just Saturday I saw a 35-40 lb cubera (I think, but he was pretty light colored) pass in front of me. He was big enough that he was checking me out and not in a big hurry to get away, but smart enough not to get too close. I didn't shoot because it was not a good chance for a stone shot and I sure don't want to waste a fish....or lose my gun. But I'm looking forward to going back and meeting him again.....and hopefully getting a good shot. Why? Beats the hell out of me. But I want to. He lives about 300 yards out in the picture in my avatar.

 

[Chad Carney]

Last time I checked (assuming these numbers are right) 80 to 90 of all big fish have been taken from our oceans. Is that not enough? How can it still be justifiable to kill off the last and best genes of each species of fish?

I know spearfishing is a ecological technique to getting fish on the table because of low by-catch and selective harvesting, but does that mean we have to try to get every last one of them?

Yes, everyone has the right to do so, but I think everybody on this board is smart enough to realize that if we all exercise that right, there simply won't be anything left to enjoy.

Shouldn't divers automatically consider themselves ambassadors of the underwatewr world? I just don't see why it would be right for me to kill a creature 5 times as old as I am to fill my freezer with 100 lbs of tough meat...

***********

Of course I don't know what I'm talking about, that was the whole point of my first thread!

Annoyed & Alienated,

Your post title was, "Why do we want to kill the big ones?" But with your comments that followed, it was clear you weren't asking a question, you were preaching.

Several of the others made good points, but I'm not one to waste much time arguing with somebody that has a condescending attiutude about aspects of the sport. This board has rules for that purpose.

My admonishment was pretty light. If you want to hear all the reasons with no punches pulled, take your post over to Spearboard.com.

Chad

 

[matjo1]

Some species, you do the most harm by taking small ones. red grouper are one, they are all female until they get old enough & they change to male. In terms of size, FWS says this happens at about 23 inches. So if you take smaller ones, you're taking females. By holding out for larger ones, you get males & have much less an impact on the species.

Very interesting, Thanks

 

[Christof]

I've never even held a spear gun and the reason seems pretty darn simple to me. Why would a boxer want to take on the champ when he could just keep fighting in the local Golden Gloves? Why do men with no reason to own anything bigger than a Civic buy a Hummer? What’s the difference between a regular wife and a “trophy wife?”

Bigger is better, and everyone (whether they like it or not) gets that.

JB

Awww, I think it's just the "small penis" thing.... LOL.... Really, I dont understand either... Whether when I was guiding, or spearing here in Florida, I would much rather eat a 20 lb grouper as a 60 lb grouper... Same with deer, elk, etc... Sure, an 8 point looks much better on my wall, but nothing eats like a young spike...
I have taken some crap for my sheepshead avitar, since most have big monster fish in theirs, but hey, I eat good all the time, and that is the main reason I do this....

I find that big old fish are just not near the eating quality, and yes, they are extremely important to the health of the species.... Just my lousy opinon....

Christof

 

[Ironhed]

I might as well lay my thoughts out here for what it is worth.
I recently attended a seminar where we discussed this topic of taking the dominant fish off of a spot. the answers I heard was once the big fish was gone that the next in line got their chance to get big. see a superfish or giant fish on a particular spot will be a glutton eating most everything around and once he is gone that gives the other guys a chance to eat without the fear of being eaten. personally I have to agree the somewhat smaller fish do taste better on my plate than the giant ones but I also have to agree that when I go down to shoot my goal is to get it done with the least amount of effort possible. i would rather shoot a 50# grouper and get it over with in one shot than to have to shoot 5 10# groupers and have to filet 5 fish as opposed to one. plus if you are on a boat and the fishing is a little on the thin side just one huge fish makes the trip worth it. There has been times where we didn't shoot many but someone shot the big one and had enough to share with everyone making it a good day. I know I wont be passing up any big fish that present themselves to me.
Another point look at what the goliath grouper has done since they are protected. they are a menace on the spots where they are found. usually you wont find much fish out and about wherever they are at. giant fish like these can be problematic to their habitats.